@rschwieb In my opinion answers that are obviously unjustifiable do not warrant a comment. For example, try h(x) = −1 and g(x) = x, for any x∈R. Since this demonstrates a basic conceptual failure regarding real exponentiation, it doesn't warrant a comment, because such users ought not to be posting so-called 'answers' in my view (and there are too many such users on Math SE to count).

@user21820 I think the (unfortunate) upvotes suggest it would be a good idea to say just that. “This obviously doesn’t work: look at .. for example.” If it had 0 votes I’d probably say nothing too.

D1, D2, D3.

D4, D5, D6.

D7, D8, D9.

D10, D11, D12.

C1, C2, C3.

C4, C5, C6.

C7, C8, C9.

C10, C11, C12.

@rschwieb Hmm. I'll consider that next time.

@user21820 The total nonsense is up for deletion. @rschwieb: Thanks for commenting there, but in this case there is no point because this user has a track record of posting such no-quality stuff.

@user21820 How did a pure PSQ like C1 get 8 up votes?? Maybe all the upvoters think that “playing around with it” is a decent context.

This question, IMHO, is a pure PSQ.

@Saad It is also a duplicate, but it now has a bounty on it, so it cannot be closed for a week.

For closure:

3741370

3743516

For deletion:

3747882

3749580

3702837

@user21820 ok cool. I just think it makes your downvote more effective, especially since it was invisible at the time :). It also saves everyone else from having to find the problem, and greases the rails for them to justify a downvote.